3/ Chesebro, Harvard educ lawyer, was architect behind fake electors scheme. In 1 memo he authored, Chesebro acknowledged he was promoting “controversial strategy” that even SCOTUS, w its conservative supermajority, would “likely” reject.

Chesebro sugg there were polit (as opposed to legal) reasons to move fwd with it. It's likely there was extensive communications among the lawyers about it. We don’t know what all might be in his emails/texts messages or exactly who he can testify against.

4/ The possibilities include at least Giuliani, Eastman, Jeff Clark & Jenna Ellis. It's not just about obtaining testimony against Trump, it’s also about obtaining testimony to encourage defendants who are closer to Trump & can testify directly against him to plead guilty as well.

@jonberger @GottaLaff If memory serves it was specified at Powell's plea hearing that hers were *not* crimes of moral turpitude. I suspect the same was true of Chesebro.

@tienle47 @GottaLaff Now that's interesting. Is this something that a sentencing court can determine? Like, let's say I plead to something that's self-evidently a crime of moral turpitude, like perjury. If the judge says "I order that this not be considered a CoMT," does that settle the matter -- that is, does that mean that my bar association is prohibited from finding that it was? Not a rhetorical question; I really don't know. But if that is what it means, that's a bit counter-intuitive, to me anyway.